MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407800363 · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.18097

Advancements in Fetal Heart Rate Monitoring: A Report on Opportunities and Strategic Initiatives for Better Intrapartum Care

2025· review· en· W4407800363 on OpenAlexafffund
Aimée A. K. Lovers, Martin Däumer, Martin G. Frasch, Austin Ugwumadu, Philip Warrick, Rik Vullings, Nicolò Pini, John Tolladay, Olav Bjørn Petersen, Christian Lederer, Yang Liu, Petar M. Djurić, Farhad Abtahi, Malin Holzmann, Samuel Boudet, Agathe Houzé de l’Aulnoit, Antoniya Georgieva

Bibliographic record

VenueBJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of HealthNovo NordiskDepartment of Health and Social CareMcGill UniversityNovo Nordisk FondenKaiser PermanenteEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsCardiotocographyCaesarean sectionPsychological interventionMedicineIntensive care medicineMultidisciplinary approachFetal heart rateHealth careMedical emergencyPregnancyNursingFetusHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiotocography (CTG), introduced in the 1960s, was initially expected to prevent hypoxia-related deaths and neurological injuries. However, more than five decades later, evidence supporting the evidence of intrapartum CTG in preventing neonatal and long-term childhood morbidity and mortality remains inconclusive. At the same time, shortcomings in CTG interpretation have been recognised as important contributory factors to rising caesarean section rates and missed opportunities for timely interventions. An important limitation is its high false-positive rate and poor specificity, which undermines reliably identifying foetuses at risk of hypoxia-related injuries. These shortcomings are compounded by the technology's significant intra- and interobserver variability, as well as the subjective and complex nature of fetal heart rate interpretation. However, human factors and other environmental factors are equally significant. Advancements in fetal heart rate monitoring are crucial to support clinicians in improving health outcomes for newborns and their mothers, while at the same time avoiding unnecessary operative deliveries. These limitations highlight the clinical need to enhance neonatal outcomes while minimising unnecessary interventions, such as instrumental deliveries or caesarean sections. We believe that achieving this requires a paradigm shift from subjective interpretation of complex and nonspecific fetal heart rate patterns to evidence-based, quantifiable solutions that integrate hardware, engineering and clinical perspectives. Such transformation necessitates an international, multidisciplinary effort encompassing the entire continuum of pregnancy care and the broader healthcare ecosystem, with emphasis on well-defined, actionable health outcomes. Achieving this will depend on collaborations between researchers, clinicians, medical device manufacturers and other relevant stakeholders. This expert review paper outlines the most relevant and promising directions for research and strategic initiatives to address current challenges in fetal heart rate monitoring. Key themes include advancements in computerised fetal heart rate monitoring, the application of big data and artificial intelligence, innovations in home and remote monitoring and consideration of human factors.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & GynaecologySame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207